Regardless, Israel has cottoned onto the tectonic plate theory as being a plausible solution to the decades' old Israel-Palestine conflict. “We want it to be our fault,” explained an Israeli official, "and pretty soon, it will be". Long a deviser of original fixes for complicated issues, Israel's latest idea has been leapt upon by nearly all parties concerned. The so-called 'Quartet' has openly lauded a new tectonic plate as a “thoroughly practical solution to a hugely incendiary problem”, and at the same time disavowed itself of the Bush administration's Road Map for Peace, now thought to be a thoroughly mundane solution to a drastic vocabulary problem.
In describing the nature of the solution, Israel was quick to thank the early 20th Century British government for its efforts, saying “it's not that the land isn't holy enough – it is, it absolutely is, it's great in fact – but ever since you gave it to us, our neighbors have been jealous and want to use it too.” Warning of the need for restraint, Britain cautioned Israel that it no longer had the receipt for the land, but that it would look for it and if possible inquire with the UN whether store credit was available. It suggested that, should the earthquake idea not work, a second diaspora to Iceland might be a “thoroughly obvious solution to a fairly elementary problem.”
In the event that it is not, Israel is already studying how to implement the tectonic plate idea. “Since our neighbors aren't so fond of us, it might be nice to drift into the Med,” explained Avi Goldberg, an engineer on the project. “Just imagine it: no problems, peaceful Mediterranean island life. I've always wondered what it would like to live on Cyprus.” Popular opinion has swelled behind the idea, abandoning such trite projects as the cooperatively produced 'Peace Oil', long derided as a thoroughly ridiculous olive-based solution to a non-culinary problem.
Critics note however that many of Israel's opponents want an end to its existence, rather than a change in location. “I don't think it's just semantics,” opined one scholar. Yet there is cause for optimism. Recently, Israeli forces discovered members of Hamas planting explosives on Israel's border. After thanking them for their assistance, the bombers were released, and encouraged to finish the job. Citizens are reportedly pleased to see the spirit of the current ceasefire extending across the border.
12 comments:
You mean you have not heard of the Jordan Valley Rift?
With the dead sea the lowest point of earth?
Really the Israel/California parallels are amazing.
There is even the Salton Sea in the Coachella Valley desert, a man made disaster, that is very similar to the dead sea.
The dead sea area is where Sodom and Gomorrah once stood.
So SF and LA being near such a huge similar fault in the San Andreas is no coincidence.
The events of the OT are for an example for the whole world, and often they are foreshadowing a greater fulfillment in the last days.
Greater fulfillment being a gross understatement.
Frodo, I'm going to assume you were serving up a soft ball pitch, so here is some shameful self promotion.
http://judgmentofsanfrancisco.blogspot.com/2009/01/judgment-of-san-francisco-and-la.html
I never considered the idea of snapping off Israel and sailing her to a nicer neighborhood tho'.
Like smack in the middle of the Mediterranean, a new Cyprus.
Tourism would be great, but the arabs would just continue to say we stole it and come after us in boats.
Besides, from the Euphrates to the Nile, from the sea to the mountains, it's all ours one day.
Yes that means much of modern Iraq, Syria, Jordan and really all of Lebanon is promised to the house of Israel.
So to settle for a tiny island the size of New Jersey is selling cheap.
Balls! I've done it again. You don't really expect me to fact check these things before I publish them, do you?
Like smack in the middle of the Mediterranean, a new Cyprus.
And then you'd probably be invaded by Turkey.
Tourism would be great, but the arabs would just continue to say we stole it and come after us in boats.
Exactly my point. I'm glad we have some common ground!
Yes that means much of modern Iraq, Syria, Jordan and really all of Lebanon is promised to the house of Israel.
Is that what they call needing a bit of lebanonsraum?
C'mon, that was classic!
Is that what they call needing a bit of lebanonsraum?
C'mon, that was classic!
Lol!
Ok, that was funny. A fine pun, if there is such a thing.
The theology and ethics are all wrong, but still, a clever pun.
Well done. :-)
To that point tho'.
I don't remember Poland attacking Germany with 6 major wars, 60 years of terrorism, and 6ooo rockets into Hannover over 6 years.
My ethics are wrong? Presumably you're going to tell me that the hypothetical swallowing up of its neighbors by Israel would be justifiable because it's been ordained by the Almighty?
No, because they have been attacking and persecuting Israel for 60 years and more.
Because they are making plans to "wipe Israel off the map" today.
They face judgment and the forfeiture of all the lands promised to Israel.
Israel makes no such threats against her neighbors, but they sure do to Israel.
A perfect example is the 6 day war.
The west bank and Sinai were supposed to be part of Israel, but Israel was content with what she had, they however were not.
The Jordanians and Egyptians invaded the west bank and Gaza in 48, and were surrounding Israel yet again in 67 boasting in their plans to "drive the Jews into the sea."
But they lost that war despite grossly outnumbering and outgunning Israel, and were driven out of the lands that were supposed to be Israel's all along.
According to int'l law, a nation has the right to defend herself and even take territories if she is repeatedly attacked from them.
Like the Golan heights.
Perfectly legal.
But all caused by arab aggression.
They do it to themselves.
The same will be true of the greater Israel to come.
Exo 1:12 But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel.
According to int'l law, a nation has the right to defend herself and even take territories if she is repeatedly attacked from them.
Like the Golan heights.
Perfectly legal.
But all caused by arab aggression.
They do it to themselves.
The same will be true of the greater Israel to come.
One of the great things about public international law is the selectiveness with which people seek to apply it. Since it's something states do to themselves and isn't imposed by anyone or anything, practically speaking it's possible to do anything, legal or otherwise, because as long as you're strong enough, who's going to stop you? And yet if it can provide a shade of legitimacy, hell, bring it on. International law. Yeah, love that thing.
In any case, the doctrine you're referring to has limited applicability, and is restricted to minuscule regions which are causing problems. It wouldn't warrant the annexation of the entire region.
Dani, I don't completely disagree with you. To a certain extent they do bring it on themselves. Electing Hamas wasn't a foresightful move. But when you say "all caused by Arab aggression" it opens up the debate to a couple of millennia worth of tit-for-tat exchanges. The natural response would be "well why is Israel even there in the first place?"
And who wants to go down that road.
If you want a valid opinion on the key matter for the whole world in the coming decades, then you must "go down that road".
It will become unavoidable soon enough.
Here is a very short video that covers it pretty well.
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/
If you ask why does Israel exist? you also must ask why does Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt etc exist as all were created when the Ottoman empire was broken up.
So to single out Israel, like it alone was forced on the region is BS.
Frodo, you are well read, and I think you want to be fair, so if you truly are interested in a sound opinion you need to educate yourself to the history of the conflict. I can tell by your comments that you are relying on liberal propaganda and are ignorant of the truth.
I exhort you to read "From time immemorial" by Joan Peters.
Until you do, I'll have little respect for your opinion as you are being willfully ignorant.
As to you ignorance of eschatology.
Israel will not be "gobbling up" neighboring nations.
She will, in self defence defeat them, then fall back to Israel and await the invasion of the Antichrist.
Remember that 2/3 of the Jewish people will die in this conflict.
By the time Israel moves into the whole of the promised land, it will be uninhabited, destroyed by God by various means.
There will also be internal conflicts in the Arab world, where they will kill each other in droves as they do today.
Again, doing it to themselves.
One of the reasons many in the Arab world had no problem with Israel bombing that nuke plant in Syria last year, or even Iran is that they hate the Persians with a zeal and dread Iran getting the bomb.
Remember the Iraq/Iran war was responsible for the deaths of many millions of muslims.
And the king of Jordan killed 100's of thousands of Palestinian terrorists in a single day in Jordan.
Yet Israel fairly defends herself and kills a single Hamas fighter, (and his human shield) and the world howls!
It's pure antisemitism. Period.
it opens up the debate to a couple of millennia worth of tit-for-tat exchanges.
You may also want to educate yourself on the issue of Jewish refugees from arab lands.
I'll be doing an article on this soon.
The dhimmi Jews suffered terribly for a couple of millennia in arab lands.
Many were either murdered or driven into Israel since 48.
Again Arabs shooting themselves in the foot, and working to create Israel.
In fact more there are more Jewish refugees from the ancient Jewish communitiues in arab lands than arabs from Israel since 48.
But they are forgotten.
Dani,
You're right, I do try to be fair. I have an interest in world history in general, and military history in particular. I'm fascinated by ancient history - The Greco-Persian War, the conquests of Alexander the Great, the rise and fall of the Roman Empire (to borrow a phrase), and have read something of the Crusades. So, you can see that it's not the geography that puts me off. One of the greatest difficulties in studying the Arab-Israeli conflict is trying to read a balanced, thorough, and emotively neutral account of it. Perhaps writing one is impossible. Maybe scholars have so much invested in their research that by the time they publish their accounts, they're a part of it too.
In addition, it's rare that a modern conflict can have such ancient roots. When each side trades insults, one can always go a generation further back to play victim to the other. I feel like a line needs to be drawn beyond which historical grievances become irrelevant, but that line would be artificial when parties to the war don't share my opinion. For them, historical grievances are hugely important.
In any case, it's not the job of a historian to take sides, it's his job to understand. And while I'm ignorant of many of the conflict's details, I feel I have a fairly good grasp as to why they still fight.
I object to being characterized as duped by liberal propaganda. I'm cynical of the popularity Palestine is enjoying in the imagination of the West. I suspect that it's cyclical, a reaction to the xenophobic euphoria in the States following 9/11. A "hey, they're people too!" And they are, obviously. But they need to bear more responsibility for choosing their leaders.
And as to my "ignorance of eschatology", you will of course understand that I consider it to be, in your own words, BS. You seek to explain away and legitimize under international law events that have not happened. If you provide me with a hypothetical situation I will apply what I know of politics and law to it. You were the one who forecast that "much of modern Iraq, Syria, Jordan and really all of Lebanon is promised to the house of Israel". Eliminating the supernatural as I am inclined to do, I struggle to imagine a situation whereby that could legitimately occur. You know I don't buy into your prophecies, so please, don't bemoan by "ignorance of eschatology" as the stumbling block to our discussion of the conflict.
PS - I watched that video several weeks back when you published it on your blog. Interesting and educational, but I am skeptical that it represents the entire breadth of the issues.
Frodo,
Since you have an interest in military history, I would again recommend "From time immemorial" as it gets into Israel's wars since 48 which are simply amazing.
Miraculous really. Esp the 6 day war. The military strategists at West Point don't spend much time teaching on Israel's wars as the outcomes are so miraculous.
As to bias, Joan Peters set out to write an expose of the "plight of the Palestinians" and when the evidence began to pile up, she had to change her outline.
The book is mostly an exhaustive account of records from all kinds of archives and does not contain much that could be called opinion.
And it does not sanitize Israel's sins either.
I'm going to beg you to read it.
As to eschatology, I only stress it as you will have no choice but to believe it soon enough.
I know that only offends you now, but I'll just bear your anger until the day you thank me.
As to using int'l law. I was not referring to it in regards to the whole of the promised land, just to the lie concerning Israel's current "occupation" of the Golan, Judea and Samaria etc.
You know that I don't give a hoot for man's laws. Esp int'l law.
Regarding the whole of the greater Israel, by the time of the end, most of the world's inhabitants will have been killed by war, including nuclear war, famine, plague, an asteroid strike etc.
So the same will be true of the promised land. The house of Israel will only inhabit it after all that destruction, not by conquest, although Israel will be fighting her enemies like never before soon enough.
On the video, of course it is not exhaustive but it does show that Israel was just one of all the nations created out of the Ottoman empire. Something that gets ignored in today's propaganda.
It was only in response to your "why an Israel?" comment
I'll just wrap up with this.
My friend, I would not waste my time with you if I didn't think you were interested in being fair.
I wish I could share more on why I know what I do beyond "God told me".
But I'm trying to lay a foundation for what is to come. I may not have a lot of time to talk to you so I've got to get it out while I can.
I can only say that your poor brain is just going to boggle when you find out who I am. :-)
Then you'll understand.
Until then, Shalom and Baruch HaShem.
Dani' El
Experts have long predicted that California is overdue an earthquake large enough for the continental United States to be forever free of it.
And sad we'd all be, should such an awful eventuality occur . . . look out, China!
If an imperial power can give away a whole country that it doesn't own, then surely the last remaining superpower can give away a piddling island. But Israel should be moved to Iceland. Cyprus is way to close to common US tourist traps, for when Israel starts strafing the native inhabitants. It'll be just as easy for the US and Israel to not give a shit about the native Icelanders' rights there, as it is in Palestine. And when the Icelander start tossing bombs disguised as snowballs into commuter ski-lifts, well . . . at least we won't be surprised.
Olive-based solutions--even to non-culinary problems--are never ridiculous. You just have to have faith.
I do like olive-based solutions, I'm just concerned about their applicability. Sure, they're tasty as hell, but wouldn't you rue the loss of an uneaten olive it was used for any other purpose besides mastication?
Heh. Crude.
Iceland works for me. Sunbathers in Tel Aviv would have to learn how to spearfish, or whatever the hell it is they do to pass the time there.
Post a Comment